So, if sea levels are rising....why is this happening?

[SSDD]

It was a real eye opener for us to see how much higher the Caribbean Sea was this last visit. The last time we were there was 2010. In just 4 years, we could actually see where the islands were losing land.

If you want to see some of the most beautiful islands in the world, don't wait because, they ARE disappearing.

Hmmmm....The wife and I have been going to Negril for twenty years and the water levels are still the same.

No one ever told him about tides.

 

[SSDD]

You guys are just being silly. Why should 3 trillion tons of greenhouse gases, which is increasing at the fastest level in history, have any impact on climate change? Everyone knows that climate change is just a conspiracy hatched by Gore. Burning more of our finite natural resource is GOOD for you. If you don't believe me, ask anyone at Exxon...

so it should be a piece of cake for you to show us in a lab how an instantaneous 100ppm increase in CO2 will raise temperatures by 2 to 6 degrees

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

Oh, I would not dare dispute you on this. How could 31,000,000 tons of greenhouse emmissions per year possibly have any effect on climate?

Lets hear your version of how you think the greenhouse effect works and how you believe man's meager contribution to the total can be separated out from natural variation. You also said that so called greenhouse gasses are rising faster now than they have in the history of the earth...can you prove that or is it just something else that you made up?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

It was a real eye opener for us to see how much higher the Caribbean Sea was this last visit. The last time we were there was 2010. In just 4 years, we could actually see where the islands were losing land.

If you want to see some of the most beautiful islands in the world, don't wait because, they ARE disappearing.

Hmmmm....The wife and I have been going to Negril for twenty years and the water levels are still the same.

No one ever told him about tides.

Apparently not. He reminds me of one of the locals in Negril named Juicy.
I asked him when high tide was........he said "me na know mon,ya cant predict de tides"
He was stunned when I told him predicting tides is "no problem mon".

 

[daveman]

You guys are just being silly. Why should 3 trillion tons of greenhouse gases, which is increasing at the fastest level in history, have any impact on climate change? Everyone knows that climate change is just a conspiracy hatched by Gore. Burning more of our finite natural resource is GOOD for you. If you don't believe me, ask anyone at Exxon...

so it should be a piece of cake for you to show us in a lab how an instantaneous 100ppm increase in CO2 will raise temperatures by 2 to 6 degrees

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

Oh, I would not dare dispute you on this. How could 31,000,000 tons of greenhouse emmissions per year possibly have any effect on climate?

Considering the planet's atmosphere weighs about 5.5 quadrillion tons, those 31M tons equal 5.63636364e-9 of the total.

So it's not going to have the effect you fear-mongers insist.

 

[jc456]

You guys are just being silly. Why should 3 trillion tons of greenhouse gases, which is increasing at the fastest level in history, have any impact on climate change? Everyone knows that climate change is just a conspiracy hatched by Gore. Burning more of our finite natural resource is GOOD for you. If you don't believe me, ask anyone at Exxon...

so it should be a piece of cake for you to show us in a lab how an instantaneous 100ppm increase in CO2 will raise temperatures by 2 to 6 degrees

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

Oh, I would not dare dispute you on this. How could 31,000,000 tons of greenhouse emmissions per year possibly have any effect on climate?

Well, prove it does. Let's see that experiment. Fact is you have no idea of what you write about. LOL, fail!

 

[asterism]

It was a real eye opener for us to see how much higher the Caribbean Sea was this last visit. The last time we were there was 2010. In just 4 years, we could actually see where the islands were losing land.

If you want to see some of the most beautiful islands in the world, don't wait because, they ARE disappearing.

Which islands? Be specific. I've been to Grand Bahama Island, Andros, Nassau, Bimini, Grand Cayman, and Jamaica at regular intervals over 20 years. Some of the smaller cays have disappeared due to erosion while other cays have appeared in places that were once sandbars.

Which islands are losing land?

 

[asterism]

You guys are just being silly. Why should 3 trillion tons of greenhouse gases, which is increasing at the fastest level in history, have any impact on climate change? Everyone knows that climate change is just a conspiracy hatched by Gore. Burning more of our finite natural resource is GOOD for you. If you don't believe me, ask anyone at Exxon...

You tell me. The CO2 concentration is much higher than it was in 1998. Where's the global temperature increase?

 

[Discombobulated]

That area flooded 5000 years ago, and has been in the tidal zone ever since. And it's still in the tidal zone. Thus I'm wondering why you thought it was a confirmation of your kooky conspiracy theory that says the whole planet is lying about sea level rise.

Try to remember that he's dedicated himself to intensive research and conducted his own comprehensive studies on global climate change. The results of those studies are very consistent.

 

[mamooth]

31M tons equal 5.63636364e-9 of the total.

Amusing fail by Dave in several categories. Fails at significant figures, fails to account that it's a per year buildup, then finally falls back on standard "a trace can't do anything!" denier stupidity.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

An ancient forest gobbled up by sea level rise 5,000 years ago has reemerged from the ocean for the first time in a long time!

How is that possible when see level is "inexorably" rising?

Did you even read your own link?

The submerged forest of Borth is not new. First flooded some 5,000 years ago by rising sea levels after the last ice age, it has been there as long as locals remember, coming and going with the tides and occasionally disappearing under the sand for years on end. But the floods and storms that battered Britain earlier this year radically changed the way archaeologists interpret the landscape: A quarter-mile-long saltwater channel cutting through the trees, revealed by erosion for the first time, provided a trove of clues to where human life may have been concentrated and where its traces may yet be found.

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

That area flooded 5000 years ago, and has been in the tidal zone ever since. And it's still in the tidal zone. Thus I'm wondering why you thought it was a confirmation of your kooky conspiracy theory that says the whole planet is lying about sea level rise.

And is now being exposed. Logically if sea levels were rising as fast as you claim then this tidal flat should be under at least a foot of water......only it isn't....

It comes in and out with the tide. Only now when the tide goes out, there is MORE EXPOSED because of the erosion from the recent torrential downpour.

You can't be this fucking stupid, seriously? Read your own damn link.

 

[westwall]

An ancient forest gobbled up by sea level rise 5,000 years ago has reemerged from the ocean for the first time in a long time!

How is that possible when see level is "inexorably" rising?

Did you even read your own link?

The submerged forest of Borth is not new. First flooded some 5,000 years ago by rising sea levels after the last ice age, it has been there as long as locals remember, coming and going with the tides and occasionally disappearing under the sand for years on end. But the floods and storms that battered Britain earlier this year radically changed the way archaeologists interpret the landscape: A quarter-mile-long saltwater channel cutting through the trees, revealed by erosion for the first time, provided a trove of clues to where human life may have been concentrated and where its traces may yet be found.

Why yes I did. Did you? Logically, if the oceans are rising at the levels you claim there is no way that tidal flats that were BELOW SEA LEVEL (i.e. UNDERWATER) BEFORE the storms...could be exposed for erosion to occur.

See how that happens?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

An ancient forest gobbled up by sea level rise 5,000 years ago has reemerged from the ocean for the first time in a long time!

How is that possible when see level is "inexorably" rising?

Did you even read your own link?

The submerged forest of Borth is not new. First flooded some 5,000 years ago by rising sea levels after the last ice age, it has been there as long as locals remember, coming and going with the tides and occasionally disappearing under the sand for years on end. But the floods and storms that battered Britain earlier this year radically changed the way archaeologists interpret the landscape: A quarter-mile-long saltwater channel cutting through the trees, revealed by erosion for the first time, provided a trove of clues to where human life may have been concentrated and where its traces may yet be found.

Why yes I did. Did you? Logically, if the oceans are rising at the levels you claim there is no way that tidal flats that were BELOW SEA LEVEL (i.e. UNDERWATER) BEFORE the storms...could be exposed for erosion to occur.

See how that happens?

Fucking shit for brains - they are exposed and re-submerged on a DAILY FUCKING BASIS AND STILL ARE.

 

[westwall]

Did you even read your own link?

Why yes I did. Did you? Logically, if the oceans are rising at the levels you claim there is no way that tidal flats that were BELOW SEA LEVEL (i.e. UNDERWATER) BEFORE the storms...could be exposed for erosion to occur.

See how that happens?

Fucking shit for brains - they are exposed and re-submerged on a DAILY FUCKING BASIS AND STILL ARE.

And, if your claims about how fast the oceans are rising were true.....that....couldn't....be.

Get it?

 

[OohPooPahDoo]

Why yes I did. Did you? Logically, if the oceans are rising at the levels you claim there is no way that tidal flats that were BELOW SEA LEVEL (i.e. UNDERWATER) BEFORE the storms...could be exposed for erosion to occur.

See how that happens?

Fucking shit for brains - they are exposed and re-submerged on a DAILY FUCKING BASIS AND STILL ARE.

And, if your claims about how fast the oceans are rising were true.....that....couldn't....be.

Get it?

No. I don't.


Please explain. When should this forest have been completely submerged?

Are you actually suggesting that lower sea levels leads to more coastal erosion?

 

[jc456]

Fucking shit for brains - they are exposed and re-submerged on a DAILY FUCKING BASIS AND STILL ARE.

And, if your claims about how fast the oceans are rising were true.....that....couldn't....be.

Get it?

No. I don't.


Please explain. When should this forest have been completely submerged?

Are you actually suggesting that lower sea levels leads to more coastal erosion?

Dude, are you serious? You can't be this stupid. You can't.

Before I say anymore, first do you believe the sea level is rising today? If not, then the point is useless. If you do believe the sea is rising, then the wall's point is there wouldn't be any erosion high tide or not. Duh, get it?

 

[mamooth]

And, if your claims about how fast the oceans are rising were true.....that....couldn't....be.

Westwall, why don't you act like a scientist and show us the numbers? Here, I'll help you, since you don't seem capable of doing it yourself.

Sea level rise over the past 5000 years -- about 2 meters

Tidal range at Borth -- around 5 meters. The coast of Wales has some of the biggest tides in the world.

So, a spot that moved into the tidal zone 5000 years ago would still be well within the tidal zone today.

The moral here? Research always destroys denier myths.

 

[orogenicman]

An ancient forest gobbled up by sea level rise 5,000 years ago has reemerged from the ocean for the first time in a long time!

How is that possible when see level is "inexorably" rising?



“We used to think of this as just as an impenetrable forest — actually this was a complex human environment,” said Martin Bates, a geoarchaeologist at the University of Wales Trinity St. David, who oversees the excavation work in Borth on a beach he played on as a toddler. “The floods have opened our eyes as to what’s really out there.”

Scanning the army of ghostly spikes protruding from the sand here one recent morning, Dr. Bates said it was as if nature were making a point: The recent torrential rains, linked by a growing number of climatologists to human-induced climate change, have provided an ancient laboratory to study how humans coped with catastrophic climate change in the past.

Indeed, across Britain, two consecutive years of exceptional winter weather have left in their wake some equally exceptional discoveries: from unexploded wartime bombs and Victorian shipwrecks to archaeological finds that are nearly a million years old. Scientists have barely kept up. Last winter was the wettest on record, according to the Met Office, the national weather service.






http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/24/science/a-sunken-kingdom-re-emerges.html?_r=1

Wow, you really are this stupid, huh?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

It was a real eye opener for us to see how much higher the Caribbean Sea was this last visit. The last time we were there was 2010. In just 4 years, we could actually see where the islands were losing land.

If you want to see some of the most beautiful islands in the world, don't wait because, they ARE disappearing.

You brought your yard stick with you?

 

[westwall]

And, if your claims about how fast the oceans are rising were true.....that....couldn't....be.

Westwall, why don't you act like a scientist and show us the numbers? Here, I'll help you, since you don't seem capable of doing it yourself.

Sea level rise over the past 5000 years -- about 2 meters

Tidal range at Borth -- around 5 meters. The coast of Wales has some of the biggest tides in the world.

So, a spot that moved into the tidal zone 5000 years ago would still be well within the tidal zone today.

The moral here? Research always destroys denier myths.

Sooooo, what you're saying is the sea level now is roughly the same as it's been for the last 5000 years. Am I getting that right?